About your Search

20110701
20110731
SHOW
STATION
CSPAN2 31
LANGUAGE
English 31
Search Results 0 to 30 of about 31
, the social security benefits drop 22%. that's a big hit for folks that are living on social security. so what can we do today, 25 years in advance, what small thing can we do today to social security which will build up the solvency and life of social security for even more years? that's a -- i think that's an honest challenge and we should view it as an honest challenge. not to eliminate social security but to say to the generation of younger workers in america, it's going to be there and you'll be darn lucky that it is there because a lot of seniors today can tell you the story of their lives paying into social security. they now receive the benefits. but what happened to their other plans for retirement? well, that little 401(k), that ira, that s.e.p. plan took a hit a few years ago, lost about 30% of its value. and for many americans with pension plans where their work, some of those companies went out of business and walked away from those pension obligations. social security has been there. we want it to be there in the future. so we can find ways to strengthen social security and give
a big deal, $4 trillion, or whether we're going to have a smaller deal of $2 trillion, but the real issue is whether or not we're going to have a fair deal, a deficit-reduction package which represents the interests of working people and the vast majority of our people or whether we're going to have a deficit reductio-reduction packh ends up reflecting the needs of the wealthiest people in this country who are do phenomenally well and the largest corporations in this country who, in many instances, are making record-breaking profits. that's really what the debate is about. now, the republican position on deficit reduction has been extremely clear and is consistent with their right-wing ideology. despite the fact that our current deficit crisis has been caused by two wars unpaid for, huge tax breaks that have gone to the wealthiest people in this country, and a recession caused by the deregulation of wall street and the lack of revenue coming in as a result of that recession. our republican friends are adamant that while the richest people in this country are becoming much richer, wh
]. >> that is affirmative, atlantis. >> copy. >> one of the other big-ticket items for atlantis's crew will be the deployment of the dish-shaped ku band antenna over the starboard, forward sill of the payload bay. >> have we missed anything? >> okay. we'll take a look. >> chris ferguson asking capcom barry wilmore to make sure the team here is looking over their shoulders to make sure they don't miss anything in the post-insertion checklist. again the ku band antenna will be deployed soon. once the payload bay doors are open, that will enable a high data rate telemetry and down link television capability from the shuttle. >> atlantis, block three does look good to us. nice work. [no audio] [no audio] >> the electrical systems officer here in mission control reports that the crew has begun the process of turning on the lights in the payload bay. that in advance of the operation of the systems by rex walheim and chris ferguson to actually open the doors, deploy the radiators, and setting the stage for a go for on-orbit operations. atlantis crossing the pacific at an altitude of 143 by 97
in transforming themselves, she's one of the big reasons why. please help me in welcoming to the stage, liz schuller. [applause] >> thank you. all right. thank you, barry, for the introduction. and i'd like to think raj for raising the bar. thanks a lot for the rest of us and not those creative messaging tools that we all need to address inequality. i wish i would have heard her before my speech. so why am i here as part of this panel? the whole point of what i want to talk to you today is the power of collective action and how it could counter the rise in inequality and how unions fit into that picture. now, when i think about inequality, especially, as of late, i think about those teachers in wisconsin, construction workers in ohio, nurses in new hampshire, who have been locked out and denied their basic rights to collective bargaining. we've seen what it looks like the state capital in wisconsin and we show you now what's happening in office buildings all across this country. ♪ >> here's to america's workers. when the economy was down, they sacrificed. during tough times when executive
in touch with mr. watson but not mr. bryant's big and presenting your committee, "the guardian" or anyone else? >> anyone who is holding material, which clearly people are, from the amounts of media coverage, and there's been some species are you surprised any of these names that are coming out, or do know these names? for example, the gordon brown issue. >> now, i am aware of them. >> mark reckless. [inaudible] holding material because of the stories coming out, is at least another theoretical possibility as stores are being sourced from within the metropolitan police? >> i'm sorry, i don't follow your. >> could it not be the opposite, whether paid or otherwise information, rather than necessary being the place that the media outlets already have it? [inaudible] >> well, we always, we will always be accused of that. i can say with absolute confidence, because i know what's been there. for instance, when there was speculation around victims of 77 bombings, we did not know that they were contained within our material. >> thank you for the answer that i wasn't accusing. >> is a natural thin
is not for light or transient reasons. it's a big, big deal when the united states government has been for months and will continue to be borrowing about 40% of every dollar we spend, running up the largest deficits the nation has ever seen. and so what the law says, that -- the law and the united states code says you should have a budget. and when you set a budget, you take all of the bills that are out there and tell them how much money they have to spend so your total amount of money at the end does not exceed a dangerous level for the c. that's whac -- for the country. that's what a budget does. and so we're going to seek and repeatedly call to this senate's attention that we got the cart before the horse. we're spending money without a budget and we're going to have to have a budget, else we are not in control of our spending. and once you have a budget, it takes 60 votes to violate the budget. you can kind of stick to it if you make up your mind to do so. and we don't have to violate it and burst the budget. so that's -- that's what we're talking about today and it's a matter of great serio
while i appreciate your reassurance, it's somewhat like you said, mr. gruenberg, about the too big to fail in response to mr. corker. we're waiting for the evidence that something is different in regard to those community banks. and so in particular, i want to -- and i certainly agree with you that the fdic insurance issues that you raise, i think are a positive development. but let me particularly raise with you the disparate treatment of capital standards between community banks and large financial institutions. the definition of well capitalized seems to have a different definition in regard to whether or not you're a large or small bank. and many of our community banks are being regulated in which they are required to have a much higher percentage of capital than our smaller banks -- i'm sorry, than our larger banks many of which those larger banks are under regulatory restrictions as a result of their financial condition. so my point is there's a double standard in my view between the capital requirements that small banks, community banks are required to have and that of large
, but it means, mr. president, that we can't be raising taxes on the job creators, and there is a big debate right now about how do we get ourselves out of this fiscal mess. i would submit to my colleagues that the real issue here is spending. if you go back to the foundation of our country, the year 1800, we were only spending 2% of our entire economic output on the government, the federal government. this year we're going to spend 24% to 25%. the historical average over the past 40 years is about 20.6%. we are dramatically higher in terms of what we are spending on our federal government as a percentage of our entire economy. to me, clearly, we don't have a revenue issue here in washington. we have a spending issue. which would suggest that we ought to get after spending, after federal spending, particularly spending that is -- is duplicative, redundant, there are so many things in the federal government that we spend money on that we need to get that waste and that -- and all those types of wasteful spending out of our spending here in washington, d.c., but we also have to focus on those
to see the quick video i promised. jfc engages a big tent of stakeholders, a big tent in shake holders because as i mentioned, a broken framework fabric of society requires as i mentioned a patchwork of everybody being brought together. not just a small group, not just one small sector, not just the military or not just the political actors but all the sectors coming together including the community, government, society, all people who need to buy into this system and be part of it and agree. and have that social contract. and the week before last, we published a case study, it's thick, a case study on jsd and tleeshsz a smaller version on our website but we tried someone who was involved walk step-by-step to paint the picture and just distill it and just a few policy recommendations. jsd, despite its name dialog is not just talking. it's not just talking and then leaving. it's really a vehicle or a means to do things that are vital to strengthening rule of law and post-conflict environment. there are a number of different things. it all has to be dependent upon the country context and
that is to come together in a bipartisan way around a big deal, around $4 trillion in savings at least. the senator from colorado went in some detail into the bipartisan debt and deficit commission. chaired bier sin bowles and alan simpson, and the 11 members of that commission, ems of members of this body currently serving senators, republican and democrat, who came together around a plan that would make $4 trillion in savings over the next decade. i think we should do no less than that. and i think the plan that we should be working on in detail now should include all four major areas where we have to have savings. reductions in discretionary domestic spending, reform to our entitlement programs, reductions in pentagon spending, and increases in federal revenue through tax reform. all four of these have to be on the table. in my view, our values ask no less than that. as we work through a recovery, we need to continue to invest in education, in infrastructure, in innovation, but we also need to responsibly put together a bipartisan path that will take on the sacred cows of this insti
outlet in mexico city was free, so i think there's been a big change, and one should remember that context. it is certainly true that there's serious threats to the lives and liberties of journalists and media organizations in mexico today, but they tend to be concentrated in remote areas away from the capitol. as was the case in colombia in the 1990s, and just in terms of the security and imp implications for democracy, i think it's crucial that moment ce moves faster on building a serious police force or serious police forces because the historic achievement of the mexican revolution was taking the army out of politics. i think in contrast to what was happening elsewhere in the region, i think there is a danger that the longer that the army's involved in the front line of -- of the crackdown against drug trafficking organizations, then the army risks becoming politicized and reputation tarnished, and, indeed, we're starting to see signs of violence in parts of mexico that are rem necessary sent of the revolution. i think the task of strengthening police forces in mexico is a
big comforter coming out of the replacement bag. here you can see it in its final configuration strapped down. it has straps that hold it into position. about the time they had it installed in this configuration, the thermal officer in the front room at mission control center stood up and turned around and said i can already see it starting to take effect. that's a very successful proje project. >> there were a lot of teams whose hard work all came in to play. a magnificent team of people. had to do it the hard way with ron and i, with ron and me traveling a lot, and not even in countries the same time together. they had to work hard. a well integrated plan put together. with all of the products and pieces that really came together. to figure out how to get that thing back. a whole lot of work by a lot of teams around the country, and really came together and made a big difference. >> the hatch is closed. ♪ i'm a rocket man ♪ rocket man >> good morning, atlantis. this is elton john. we wish you much success on your mission and huge thank you to all the men and women at nasa
health centers that will determine it for the long-term the factors that will do with big diseases under two prevent them and teacher than. now, we have noted with the prime minister and we worked all weekend on this, that different choices that we did following an independent jury, forgot cancer, or didn't deal with cancer. that was the rule. you go for excellence, you go for international juries. we cannot change the decision of these juries, otherwise what use would that be? i mean, the selection process has to be respected. but we thought that it was impossible not to have hospital institutes dealing with cancer. and so we have asked others, seeing the second stage of the cancer plan and what the national institute for cancer is doing to make proposal on the specific question of cancer. in order to have a dedicated university hospital center. at the beginning of july, we're going to announce the first selection of these excellence initiatives, 7.7 billion euros. the winners will be the beginning of the major sites for french scientific research, not all universities will be part and
, it absolutely matters for economic development. and people in big cities might make fun of small airports, that they don't have all the -- all the hustle and bustle, but we do know that medium sized and smaller airports matter a great deal. with the refusal of the house to take up a clean extension of f.a.a., more than 4,000 employees have been furloughed, dozens of construction projects have come to a halt. in this economy, for some radicals in the house of representatives to decide because they have got a political mission and an ideology that doesn't quite fit with the majority of americans, they are going to again hold hostage something that just simply needs to be done, and that is what's called reauthorization of f.a.a. this many employees have been furloughed for who knows how long. senator rockefeller said some may look elsewhere for jobs. these are very skilled technicians and engineers and others. and what it means to these construction projects. f.a.a. helps to pay all over the country for modernization of airports, and we have all heard stories. i don't recall that i have ever
essentially go to another country and export through that country, put on, for example, "made in korea" -- big implications with these trade agreements -- and end up shipping those goods to the united states. and senator blunt and his constituents have made the correct point that that's, again, taking away jobs from middle-class folks. but we have got to get back here on the floor of the united states senate to the issue of jobs. that's the most important question for our constituents, madam president. staff told me on the way over here that a recent survey of businesses cites again their number-one concern, that sales are going down in their stores. and i think everybody here in the senate knows you can often go to a store on a weekend or an evening and you see hardly anybody there because middle-class people are very worried about what's ahead and simply because of these economic times do not have the money to go in and buy those goods and arrange for those services that in an economy that requires they be in the marketplace, they simply don't have the resources for it. so i hope my colleagu
that he likes to call a big deal. anyone who's looked at the figures knows that it isn't. but the larger point here is that the american people have already won this debate. no one, not even the president, can claim to support the status quo anymore, even when in fact he does. but of course winning the debate isn't nearly as important as achieving the reforms that are needed to convince the world that we're actually serious about getting our fiscal house in order. that's why republicans continue to hold out for significant reforms and that's why we'll continue to fight for serious long-term reforms this week. republicans have tried to persuade the president of the need for a serious course correction, but weeks of negotiations have shown that his commitment to big government is simply too great to lead to the kind of long-term reforms we need to put us on a path to both balance and economic growth. so we've decideed to bring our case to the american people. the president recently cited a poll that suggests americans want to see balance in this debate. i'd point him to another poll showin
procedure, the regular order but have attempted to solve this big problem in secret, behind closed doors with just a few people. i believe that is contrary to the historical understanding of the role of congress and i'm not happy about it, i oppose it and i object to it and i expect an appropriate amount of time to consider whatever plan comes forward. i thank the chair and would yield the floor. mr. franken: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota. mr. franken: thank you, mr. president. this weekend driving around the twin cities, i was listening to public radio. the host of the program introduced a republican member of the house budget committee. the member, who i will not name to spare him or her a great deal of embarrassment, was asked about the consequences of not raising the debt ceiling. the member assured the host and listeners that failing to raise the debt ceiling would not create a default for a number of reasons. among them was that, according to this member, that we can pay out all the social security checks to seniors because -- and i quote -- "the
and they count on washington, not always to take care of everything but take care of the big things like making sure we don't default on our obligations. he needed to talk to the american people, to those americans who haven't been paying close attention where this stands and why it is so important and why the risk is there that if congress doesn't act and we believe it will, something that has never happened before in our history could happen and it would be very bad indeed. that's why he had to address the country and why he wanted to explain to them his view, that compromise is so necessary. >> one other quick thing. i think on cbs radio this morn dan pfeiffer said if congress does not act by august 2nd this could lead to a depression. is this your position, that we might have a depression in america? >> depression, what i know, what, economic experts have said is that, and again, republican and democrat, jim baker, ronald reagan, all sorts, have said that a default on our obligations would produce an economic calamity. how that, how you demean that obviously depend on how long it lasts and
should we allow our tax dollars to buy chinese solar panels? makes no sense to me. >> how about your big ridge? tell us about that. [laughter] >> it does seem as if, if anything, the politics, as dynamic as it might be. i certainly agree on that. might be going in the opposite direction. i'm talking presidential politics, the bloomberg breakfast the other day in which it seems as if the clinical strategy of the administration is to avoid a discussion of jobs to the unemployment rate at all. but let's talk about some of the specifics if we can. maybe patrick ewing talk a little bit about in more detail about the china trade issue, the environment for getting comfortable with china -- tougher with china. >> i'm a member of the u.s.-china economic review commission. this is a bipartisan congressional think tank on china. we've issued a number of reports, almost all have been unanimous, republicans and democrats seen it in exactly the right. i'm a member of the commission. i'm not speaking for the commission at this thing. our website is -- everything we do is up there. let me just quickly g
that submerged that's been debated about too big to fail, there's no point they did. in fact, when the republicans have the hearings on the international competition, two industry witnesses, one representing the bank, orientation, and one house from harvard who's been the supporter of a strong event and industry and skeptical of some regulations and committee both noted that there was a potential competitive disadvantage for large american financial institutions because we are so firm in not allowing bailouts. they noted that america has by far the strongest anti-public participation in bailout law and rules in the world and that this could be a problem for american institutions and others. the argument, bit way, that being designated as a systemically important financial institution is an advantage because you will be able to borrow more cheaply. this is -- we've heard of the gift that keeps on giving -- this is the gift that people keep on refusing. unanimously, any institution there that's discretion about to whether or not it was designated as systemically important has vehemen
of arizona. that's not to say that we don't cover a big portion of it right now. of the 1,000 new border patrol agents that are coming into service this year, the vast majority of them are going into arizona. but it's also critical to note that there are other activities occurring. our partnerships with mexico, for example, working joint operations with our mexican partners with them operating in mexico and us over on the u.s. side. over 60 of the states' law enforcement agencies are our partners with us in actt, which is an operation that incorporates other law enforcement agencies to ensure we bring the greatest density of enforcement coverage in arizona. the national guard -- right now we have 363 national guard troops on the ground. we have more sensors coming, so it's a constant buildup of what we are doing in arizona. as i said earlier, when we bring arizona under control, not if, we will do so as quickly as we can. now, something that i think is critical here is the following. this year, because of the drop in activity levels that we have seen, we figure that we will end up the ye
the discipline of the market place because their size, complexity and interconnectedness made them too big to fail under the resolution processes in place at the time. the expectation of a large financial companies enjoyed the implicit backing of the federal government allow the managers of the company to book short-term profits while ignoring the buildup of tail risk in here in a complex mortgage instruments they held. in the financial market chaos that followed the september 2008 bankruptcy of lehman brothers, the expectation of government support persistent important financial institutions, or sifis, became a really good government assistance to financial institutions took on a variety of forms. a total commitment of almost $14 trillion by the spring of 2009. direct assistance to the largest financial institutions easy to short-term crisis of confidence in the interbank market. and our financial system began to function again. the policymakers fail to effectively attack the root cause of the problem, which was the enormous backload -- backlog of unaffordable and underwater mortgage loan
such a difficult time, but they're getting killed by the big warehouses that are selling to the folks who like to buy car parts. and, but this isn't just a main street versus internet because all these internet companies are on main street somewhere. and what happens when we get to the point where everybody's internet? aren't we all still just main street? and aren't we then in the same exact position as we are today where the internet, main street retailer in downtown sioux falls, south dakota, is competing with the internet mainstream retailer in utah without that price differential, and, you know, they're butting heads against each other trying to steal reach other's -- each other's local customers. in our view this is a retailing versus retailing, and at some point in this process we all have to compete with each other without the government giving one a competitive advantage over another. >> host: mr. peterson, you said earlier that you saw state sales tax going away. could you expand on that a little bit? >> guest: there is considerable concern among my employers that as you and i, the t
, vote for this amendment. mr. president, how big is this scheme? well, here's what our own permanent subcommittee on investigations has told us: "experts have estimated that the total loss to the treasury from offshore tax evasion alone approaches $100 billion per year, including $40 billion to $70 billion from individuals and another $30 billion from corporations engaging in offshore tax evasion. abusive tax shelters add tens of billions of dollars more." mr. president, you want to lock in these abuses? you prefer to pay more in taxes yourself so that people can engage in these scams? vote for this amendment. vote for the legislation that's before us. vote for what is on the floor because you'll protect them forever more. mr. president, i end as i began. this is perhaps the most ill-conceived, ill-considered, internally inconsistent legislation that i have ever seen in my 25 years in the united states senate. i hope my colleagues have the wisdom to vote "no." i thank the chair and yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator indiana. mr. coats: mr. president, i just would lik
. speaker, in this debate, let us not lose sight of the big picture. the people who send us here want some pretty straightforward things. they want their media free and punchy but they want them within the law. they want their police independent and strong but honest and incorruptible. and they want their politicians to sort out a mess that has socked their faith in the key institutions in our country. we should be clear today that we will not let them down. >> here, here! >> order, the question is this house have considered the matter of public confidence in the media and the police. mr. ed miliband. >> mr. speaker, i welcome this debate and i think in starting this debate all of us should remember what brings us here. because parliament would not have been recalled today if it had not been for the revelations by the hacking of millie doweler's phone. that revelation shocked our country and turned something that had seemed to be about the lives of politicians, footballers and celebrities into something very different. about the lives of others who never sought the public eye. and it is th
. it would be a new day here to get these bills rather than having some big omnibus bill. so this is a step in the right direction. again, i express my appreciation to the two managers of this legislation. as indicated, there will be no roll call votes today. more roll call votes today. tomorrow i'm going to move to proceed to the bill that we call the cut, cap bill received from the house today. under the rules of the senate, a cloture vote on the motion to proceed to the bill will occur on saturday. i expect a cloture vote sometime saturday before lunch time. i'm committed to allowing a fair and full debate on this bill. i want the proponents and opponents to have time to air their views. if proponents of the bill decide they would like to vote sooner, if they would let me know, i would appreciate that and we'll try to work something out. there may be efforts made to try to advance that vote by others but as far as i'm concerned, we should have a full and fair debate on this matter and i look forward to that. mr. mcconnell: mr. president, if i may? the presiding officer: the republican le
. >> softly and carry a big stick. >> kenya signal intense. >> gadhafi said all these present -- positive things. i hope he told me do those things and we will come after you. i think that should have caused gadhafi to pull back. that is what i would have done. number three is to sort of model and to a we are going to change the regime there and i think that is where we ended up and is not what he told the american people. >> the next question comes from the audience, dr. benjamin from hanover. >> governor romney, president george w. bush used a federal probe graham no child left behind in an effort to improve the quality of our k-12 education system. other republicans believe that the states should be left to reform their educational systems without federal mandates be they funded or unfunded. what is your strategy for improving public education and what is your rationale for it? >> my strategy for public education improvement has been shown in my leadership in massachusetts which is that and this wasn't just me by the way. it was prior governors and prior legislators in massachusetts. w
their resilience to adapt, and what is the troop strength of al-shabab? how big is it? and are weapon withs coming through sudan, eritrea, and are any of those weapons coming from china? with regards to the pirates, dr. murphy points out in his testimony and others have pointed out in their testimony as well that there are, you know, there needs to be a land solution. and i think that's obvious, but if you briefly could touch on that. chairman royce? we'll do all the questions so that -- >> yeah. and i'll be very brief as well. deputy assistant secretary yamamoto, if i could ask you this question: when the last administration left office, there was an internal debate over whether eritrea should be designated a state sponsor of terrorism for its support for al-shabab. um, it didn't happen at the time, but just after she left government service, former assistant secretary frazier wrote a good piece in "the wall street journal", and the theme was eritrea should be listed as a state sponsor of terrorism. and i think, you know, we've got u.n. report after u.n. report citing their support for al-shabab.
parents to protect entitlements for big oil companies, billionaire corporate executives who travel the world in private jets and millionaires who believe they are entitled to all of the tax loopholes they're getting now after the biggest tax cut in history, entitled to tax cuts but not obligated to create american jobs. contrary to the false rhetoric we hear from the other side about a correlation between entitlements for the wealthy and job creation. the hard right wing of the republican party has come to the table willing to give up nothing, unwilling to accept an offer by the president and democrats of trillions of dollars in spending cuts, potential savings in entitlement programs and tax reform options, all of which they have been demanding, unless we agree to protect to the entitlements that exist for the wealthy. not even a single penny on the revenue side of the option. don't touch those entitlements for the big five oil companies. don't touch the entitlements for the corporate jets. don't touch the entitlements for the racehorses. don't touch any of those entitlements give
the big lobbyists who make hundreds of thousands a year, $560 a year or or $1,000 a year may not seem like a lot of money, but if you are a senior trying to get by on on $14,000, $15,000, $18,000 a year and you're 85 years old, the end of your life, you're totally vulnerable, you're sick, sick, $1,000 a year cut in what you otherwise would have received is a major, major blow. so i congratulate senator coburn, senator crapo, senator chambliss for doing what president obama said would not happen under his watch, what the democrats have said would not happen under their watch, major cuts in social security. but it's not just social security. we have 50 million americans today who have no health insurance at all. under the gang of six proposal, there will be cuts in medicare over a ten-year period of almost almost $300 billion. there will be massive cuts in medicaid and other health care programs. there will be caps on spending, which mean that there will be major cuts in education if you are a working class family, hoping that you're going to be able to send your kid to college and that you
we have to learn the harsh lesson that when we are in an economic free fall, the only entity big enough to pull us out is the collective organization of our government? that is the only place that has the muscle to prevent a recession from turning into a depression, and the balanced budget amendment our colleagues cept us before would absolutely lock down the federal government's ability to respond. that would be a profound mistake, and contradict all we have learned in economics since the great depression. this is what norm ann ornstein at the american enterprise institute said about this constitutional amendment. he called it 5, quote, "really dumb idea." this is what he said. "few ideas are more seductive on the surface and more destructive in reality than a balanced budget amendment. here's why -- nearly all of our states have balanced budget requirements. that means when the economy slows, states are forced to raise taxes or slash spending at just the wrong time, providing a fiscal drag when what is needed is countercyclical policy to stimulate the economy. in fact, the fisc
Search Results 0 to 30 of about 31

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)